Guilty Pleas Case Study

This essay will explore how prosecutorial misconduct causes wrongful convictions in both the United States and Australia. This essay will also argue that rehabilitation and compensation should be provided by the state. A major flaw in the criminal justice system not only in the United States but also in Australia, is the failure to set forth a plan for the people who were exonerated to be accepted back into society. The lack of a plan for rehabilitation for the exonerated poses a problem for society since some might find it easier to find a job in prison then in the real world, this process makes it immensely difficult for prisoners to get acclimated back into society. The Australian Law Review Committee is an entity which evaluates and gives

During criminal cases, many prosecutors and attorneys struggle with trying to prove whether or not the defendant committed the crime. Is there such a way to legally coerce the defendant to confess to his or her crime? Enter the plea bargain. A plea bargain occurs when a defendant agrees to plea guilty in exchange for a reduction of charges and a lighter sentence than what the crime usually carries. Most people may see plea bargains as a boon to the defendant, but may end up hurting the defendant. The courts always benefit from plea bargains either way, but the defendant must still answer for their crimes.

According to Erlanger “several jurisdictions reported that ninety percent of felony cases ended in guilty pleas” during the end of the 19th century (Erlanger, H. S., 2005). As of now the percentage has dramatically increased and placed many innocent victims into pleading guilty for a crime they never committed. To scholars such as Mike McConville and Chester Mirsky, plea bargaining has been viewed as a “legitimizing” institution. The court room has approved and encourages defendants to continue pleading guilty. Changing the meaning and the actual purpose of plea bargaining the method of punishment has become a challenge in the courtroom because they do not have to invest unnecessary time on appeals.

How can you tell if someone is a criminal? Well you can tell by their behavior towards the situation. If they show no emotion. If they have a motive or an alibi. If someone has all of these traits you can bet you have a criminal. It seems that Lizzie Borden committed these sick and twisted crimes due to her anger, time of day, and the evidence.

Prior to 28th January 2015, bail laws posed significant loopholes in the system and are deemed to be ineffective to achieve justice. Accused offenders may get away with bail based with evidence in the case if it does not seem to pose a threat to the community. The problem persists within the conditions set for their bail, as responsibility lies upon the magistrate or police to impose appropriate conditions. However, though conditions do vary, it possesses a significant risk if the conditions enforced were not strict enough, opening vulnerabilities for the accused to commit another crime, slipping through their enforced conditions.

However, under further analysis, it becomes apparent that the verdict acts more as a deterrent rather than an upstanding legal configuration. The legal system, for the average person in New South Wales, is only a figure of authority that deters the individuals from breaking the law, which some may say is what it is there to do. Conversely, we need it to do more than that, we need it to properly meet our requests when we are involved in legal

“The advantages, gamesmanship, and leverage that account for a plea bargain override an honest and fair assessment of truth” (Strutin, 2013). This statement is painfully accurate. Yale Law Journal (1972) states that “the elimination of the maximum number of trials” is the purpose of the plea bargain. Plea bargains are a largely a result of a need for speed and efficiency in the courts. “However, efficiency comes at a significant cost: innocent defendants are induced to plead guilty” (Gilchrist, 2011). In many, cases plea bargains are too efficient. “These wrongful convictions not only harm the innocent persons who plead guilty; they undermine the reliability of all convictions” (Gilchrist, 2011). This brings controversy over all plea bargains .Speed and efficiency should never be placed over reaching the correct verdict. All that is needed for a plea bargain is admission from the defendant; however, a defendant cannot convict themselves with a testimony in trial. This practice illustrates the controversy of plea bargains as compared to more reliable trials. Plea bargains allow for defendants to be coerced into giving false admissions of guilt. Additionally, defendants are confused by their emotions during the plea bargain process.

A plea bargain (“offer”) is an agreement in a criminal case whereby the prosecuting agency may offer the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty, usually to a lesser charge or to the original criminal charge with a proposal of a lighter than the maximum sentence. This opportunity allows defendants to avoid the risk of a conviction at trial on a more serious charge. This also allows all involved parties to keep the court’s calendars light without exhausting resources of a court, potential public defenders, and prosecutors who are all salaried for by the expense of tax payers. If every case in the criminal justice system went to trial, the courts would be so overloaded that they would effectively be shut down.

Plea-bargaining is known as a practice of negotiation where the prosecutor makes certain sacrifices and gives a lesser charge or sentence to the defendant in exchange for a guilty plea. Plea-bargains are done out of court, when one side begins to arrange a potential plea bargain. However the plea bargain does not go through until both the prosecuting side and the defense agree on it (Unconstitutionality). After both sides come to an agreement the plea bargain is brought before the judge, however the judge does not have to follow the prosecutor’s proposal. Some plea bargains may have to get the approval of the court before being upheld (Unconstitutionality). In plea bargains the defendants can plead guilty to some or all of the charges that

We hear in the news about police misconduct, use of excessive force, embezzlement, but one thing I found while researching what I should write this paper on is the Wrongful convictions of innocent men and women, that spend years in prison being innocent, and there is nothing that gets done till it’s too late. Some wrongful convictions are honest mistakes, but many times law enforcement and prosecutors lose sight of the obligation of ensuring truth and justice, and are focused on their conviction rates. As with any job, they are honest people and ones that just don’t care and are corrupt, this exists in the criminal justice system. One way to prove someone is innocent now is through DNA testing, but even at all levels of a criminal investigation there could be misconduct or mishandling of evidence, which then causes the evidence to become compromised.

Plea bargains are a negotiation between a prosecutor and defendant, in which the defendant will agree to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence. There have been mixed feelings about plea bargains recorded over the years, including arguments that say a plea bargain denies the defendant the right to a fair trial, as well as a long wait time for a trial (Savitsky, 2012). This can cause a serious dilemma for the defendant, in which it may be better to take the lighter sentence, regardless if the defendant is guilty or not, as other problems, like paying for legal help, may be more costly in the end (Savitsky, 2012). This does not deliver justice, and can only hurt the defendant, as having a criminal record can effect rate of employment and contribute to the high recidivism rate of United States

The authors confirm that there exists evidence supporting the fact that many criminal justice processes are unfair and could be described as biased, subjective, inequitable, serving financial morals and grows out of the criminal law. They also conclude from the study that the myth on the criminal justice system being fair is not true from the law making department down to the correctional department.

First, victims often feel let down or dissatisfied after a court proceeding if the criminal does not receive a proper criminal conviction. The victim needs to have more say in the conviction especially if we're talking about a violent crime. This issue needs to be addressed because victims should not feel dissatisfied after everything they went though. I would implement that victims have more say in the court hearings just to stress the seriousness of the crime committed. The story needs to be told much more by the person the crime was acted on then attorneys who weren’t actually there. This way jurors can get the full effect of the victims emotions and sentence a fair conviction.

Although rationality does not always exist, much of the functioning of criminal justice agencies is unplanned, poorly coordinated, and unregulated. Existing systems include some components that are very ancient, additionally each of the institutions have their own set of goals and priorities that sometimes conflict with those of other institutions, or with the goals and priorities of the system as a whole. Furthermore, each of these institutions have substantial unregulated discretion in making particular decisions such as the victim's decision to report a crime (Frase & Weidner).

“It’s a general problem not specific to the law of the United Kingdom a criminal justice system characterized by an emphasis on crime control rather than due process will inevitably produce miscarriage of justice.”